PRETORIA – South Africa’s Minister of Trade, Industry and Competition, Parks Tau, has formally requested that the United States provide specific evidence to justify an investigation into the country’s alleged failure to prohibit the import of goods produced through forced labor.
The request comes as South Africa finds itself among 60 nations under scrutiny by the US Trade Representative (USTR) in a sweeping probe launched in March under Section 301 of the US Trade Act. Minister Tau is seeking clarity on the nature of the goods in question and the specific countries of origin from which these products are allegedly entering South Africa.
The investigation represents a significant escalation in US efforts to export its labor standards and supply chain transparency requirements to its global trading partners. By leveraging Section 301-a powerful trade tool that allows the US to investigate and retaliate against “unreasonable or discriminatory” foreign trade practices-Washington is signaling a shift toward more systemic enforcement of forced-labour bans worldwide and the externalization of its domestic regulatory regime.
The Scope of the Section 301 Investigation
The USTR’s probe is not limited to a specific region, targeting a diverse array of global economies including China, the European Union, the United Kingdom, Japan, Mexico, Israel, Russia, and Australia, in addition to a number of emerging markets. The primary objective is to determine whether these trading partners have enacted, and are strictly enforcing, bans on goods produced with forced labour-conduct that is already prohibited under US domestic law through measures such as the ban on importing goods made with forced labour into the US market.
From the US perspective, the investigation is framed as both a human-rights and economic necessity. Washington argues that foreign producers who utilise forced labour gain an artificial cost advantage, which directly undercuts American manufacturers and workers by flooding the market with unfairly cheap goods and undermining companies that comply with higher labour and compliance standards.
The US is now effectively demanding that its partners actively police their own supply chains and points of entry to ensure that exploited goods are blocked at their borders, turning trading partners into frontline enforcement agents for US-aligned labour standards. For Pretoria, that raises questions about institutional capacity, legal mandates and the extent to which domestic enforcement priorities should be aligned with a foreign power’s trade enforcement agenda.
“It is important to make it clear the South African Constitution and laws prohibit any forced labour in the country,” Tau said in a written reply to a parliamentary question by MK Party MP Zelna Abader.
Tau’s response positions the dispute as one of evidence and implementation, rather than a clash over core principles, and implicitly defends South Africa’s governance record by pointing to existing constitutional and statutory protections.
Economic Stakes and the AGOA Nexus
While Minister Tau has attempted to decouple the investigation from South Africa’s broader diplomatic and trade relationship with Washington, domestic critics argue the two are inextricably linked. The primary concern centres on the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), the US legislative framework that grants qualifying Sub-Saharan African nations preferential, duty-free access to the US market and is periodically renewed by the US Congress.
Business groups and MPs warn that even if the Section 301 process is formally separate, adverse findings could feed into the political calculus in Washington when AGOA eligibility is reviewed, putting pressure on Pretoria to demonstrate credible enforcement against forced-labour-tainted imports.
MP Zelna Abader warned that Section 301 investigations are frequently precursors to punitive measures and can be used to justify unilateral trade remedies. She highlighted the risk to thousands of local jobs, particularly in the agriculture and automotive sectors, which rely heavily on AGOA benefits for export access and investment certainty.
“Section 301 investigations were ‘typically used as a precursor to punitive tariffs and trade sanctions, and given the very real risk such investigation poses to the Republic’s continued access to Agoa, which supports thousands of local jobs in key sectors such as the automotive and agriculture sectors, what specific steps has his department taken to prevent the Republic from being exposed to possible trade penalties and the potential loss of Agoa benefits’,” Abader asserted.
Minister Tau has countered these concerns, maintaining that the investigation and AGOA are separate legal and legislative matters. He noted that AGOA is an act of Congress, and its future is decided through a different mechanism than the USTR’s administrative trade probes, even if, in practice, US policymakers may consider a country’s labour and human-rights record when assessing continued eligibility under AGOA’s statutory criteria.
Diplomatic Positioning and Trade Relations
South Africa is currently navigating a complex geopolitical landscape, balancing its membership in BRICS+ and its ties with China and Russia against its vital economic relationship with the US. Tau emphasised that the US remains a leading destination for South Africa’s value-added manufactured exports, with over 600 American companies currently invested in the country across sectors such as automotive, mining services and financial services.
For Pretoria, the Section 301 probe has become a test of how to defend policy sovereignty while avoiding an escalation that could spill over into broader trade and investment relations. Senior officials have framed the government’s approach as one of “engagement without capitulation”: acknowledging US concerns about forced labour, insisting on clarity and due process, and seeking to demonstrate that South Africa’s domestic institutions are capable of enforcing its own laws.
To mitigate the risk of targeted sanctions and signal policy stability to investors, the South African government has highlighted the following points regarding the current trade climate:
- The Section 301 investigation is applied broadly to 60 different countries, rather than being a bilateral dispute confined to the US and South Africa.
- Existing 10% Section 122 tariffs implemented by the US are universal and not targeted specifically at South African exports, limiting the immediate, country-specific impact on local producers.
- The South African government has already indicated its willingness to engage in consultations requested by the US, including responding to information requests and participating in hearings, in order to demonstrate compliance and avoid escalation.
Minister Tau clarified that the trade track remains active and operational despite broader geopolitical disagreements between Pretoria and Washington, and said his department is coordinating with other arms of government to ensure that South Africa’s responses are consistent with its constitutional commitments and its international trade obligations.
South Africa is scheduled to provide formal responses to the issues raised during the US public hearings held between April 28 and May 1. Those submissions, together with any follow-up technical exchanges, will help determine whether Pretoria can convince Washington that its import controls and labour enforcement systems are robust enough to withstand the unprecedented scrutiny generated by this latest use of Section 301-and, by extension, whether it can shore up its position ahead of the next review of AGOA and other US trade preferences.